Welcome to today's deep dive. We are thrilled
to have you with us. If you've been looking at
the news lately, scrolling through your feed
and just feeling totally overwhelmed by the sheer
unadulterated chaos of the current cycle, you
are in the exact right place. Yeah, absolutely.
We see you. We know you're looking for some clarity
and we are going to get through this together
today. We really do have a fascinating. convergence
of events on the table, we are pulling from a
massive stack of analysis today taking two complex
storylines that, well, they might seem completely
separate at first glance. But they are actually
colliding in some incredibly impactful ways.
Exactly. On one side of the table, we have a
granular precinct by precinct breakdown of the
March 3rd, 2026 U .S. primaries. We're talking
about absolute political earthquakes happening
in Texas, North Carolina and Arkansas. Plus some
congressional drama that honestly feels like
it was scripted for prestige television. It really
does. And then on the other side of the table,
we have a high level macroeconomic analysis of
the global market fallout following the recent
U .S. and Israeli strikes on Iran. And our mission
for this deep dive is to extract the signal from
that noise for you. We want to help you understand
exactly how domestic political volatility here
in the U .S. and global energy shocks are intertwining.
Right, and what that actually means for the world
at large. Yeah, the real world application. But
before we jump into the numbers, I want to speak
to you, the listener, directly about the nature
of the research we are unpacking today. It's
an important caveat. Right. The political analysis
we're working from contains some highly charged,
very opinionated language from both the left
and the right sides of the political aisle. Extremely
charged. Because we are analyzing the raw political
mechanics. You're going to hear us use terms
directly from the text terms, like rat -fuking,
Trumpy voters, lefties, and Maggier water carriers.
And we want to state unequivocally that neither
of us is taking a side here. Not at all. We are
not endorsing these viewpoints, these candidates,
or the language used by the analysts. We are
strictly and impartially conveying the analysis
and the ideas exactly as they are presented in
the original source material. We want you to
have the full, unfiltered picture of what the
strategists are looking at. So, okay, let's unpack
this. Let's do it. We need to start with the
sheer scale of the political earthquakes we just
saw, particularly focusing on the raw data coming
out of Texas. It serves as a massive bellwether
right now. Oh, absolutely. The GOP Senate runoff
is undeniably the biggest story of the night.
Huge. You have incumbent Senator John Cornyn
and State Attorney General Ken Paxton finishing
in what is essentially a dead heat. A total nail
-biter. Right. Looking at the final tally. Cornyn
got 41 .9 % of the vote, and Paxton got 40 .9%.
And because neither of them crossed that 50 %
threshold to avoid a runoff, they are heading
to a brutal rematch on May 26. But the really
crucial detail hiding in this data is the remaining
13 % of voters, the ones who chose a third candidate.
Wesley Hunt. Yeah, that 13 percent is everything.
The prevailing theory in the analysis is that
if voters know a high profile incumbent like
Cornyn and still actively choose someone else,
they are basically looking to throw the bums
out. It indicates a massive anti -incumbent wave.
Exactly. Meaning a huge chunk of those Hunt voters
are highly likely to migrate straight to Paxton
in the runoff. What's fascinating here is the
financial ripple effect this creates. This stops
being just a Texas problem and immediately becomes
a National Republican Party problem. How so?
Well, to save an incumbent like Cornyn in a state
as massive and expensive as Texas, the GOP is
going to have to spend lavishly. Right. Texas
media markets are not cheap. Not at all. The
projections suggest they will need to burn through
708 figures a week for the next 12 weeks leading
up to that runoff. Oh, wow. 708 figures a week.
Think about the practical mechanics of that.
That is millions upon millions of dollars draining
out of the national war chest in the spring.
Money that simply will not be available in the
fall. Exactly. It won't be there for the general
election or to support other incredibly tight,
vulnerable races across the country. It is a
massive, unexpected resource sink. And the Democratic
side of the Texas Senate race is just as wild,
largely because the polling leading up to it
was an absolute disaster. A total miss. State
Representative James Tellerico defeated Representative
Jasmine Crockett 53 percent to 46 percent. The
data points out that pretty much every major
pollster got this completely wrong. Say for one
last minute YouGov poll that caught the late
shift. Right, just the one YouGov poll. The big
takeaway for anyone tracking this is that these
primary electorates are going to be incredibly
tough to pull this year. Highly unpredictable.
But to understand why the vote actually shook
out the way it did, the researchers provided
three distinct maps of Texas. I want to describe
these for you because they are incredibly revealing
about voter behavior. They really paint a vivid
picture of the underlying dynamics. You simply
can't see this just by looking at the final vote
tally. Right. So Map 1 shows the 2024 presidential
vote broken down by county. Red shading for Trump
counties. Blue shading for Harris counties. Map
2 shows the results of this exact Democratic
primary we're talking about. Orange shading for
Tolerico counties. Blue shading for Crockett
counties. Got it. And finally, map 3 shows the
black population density of each county, with
redder shades indicating a much higher black
population. And the analysis draws two competing
hypotheses by layering these maps over one another.
And theory 1 and theory 2. Right. Theory 1 emerges
when you pair map 1 with map 2. The geographic
correlation there suggests a highly organized
strategy that political operatives refer to as
rat -fuking. Such an intense term. It is, but
it describes a very specific tactic. This is
the idea that that a significant number of Trump
voters intentionally crossed over, requested
Democratic ballots in the primary, and voted
for Crockett. And their goal wouldn't be to actually
elect her. No, simply to sabotage the Democrats
by sticking them with a candidate they perceived
as much less electable in a general election
against a Republican. That level of coordinated
crossover voting is wild to think about happening
on a mass scale, but the data suggests it's a
real possibility. It is, but then the researchers
present theory too. Right, the second map layering.
If you pair map two, the primary results, with
map three, the black population density, it tells
a completely different story, one purely of identity
politics. Because Crockett performed exceptionally
well in areas with higher black population. Exactly.
If this second theory is the correct one, the
analysis notes it's actually much better news
for the Democratic Party overall. It just means
Tallurico needs to find a way to bridge that
gap and connect with black voters before the
general election. And the strategist suggests
this is highly doable. for him. They specifically
note that he speaks fluent Christian and can
likely appeal to those communities on shared
cultural and religious grounds. It could very
well be a mix of both theories. But either way,
Tallarico has a huge opportunity to consolidate
that base. Now here's where it gets really interesting.
Yes. Because the chaos isn't just isolated to
the Senate. The House of Representatives is dealing
with a razor thin margin and the power of incumbency
just took a massive unprecedented hit. We saw
this exact same anti -incumbent fever breaking
out in the North Carolina and Arkansas primaries
as well. Establishment candidates finding themselves
dragged into brutal purity tests. But the biggest
shocker of them all. The fall of Representative
Dan Crenshaw in Texas District 2. Yeah, that
was stunning. He lost to State Representative
Steve Toth by a staggering margin of 56 % to
40 .5%. A margin of defeat that large? For a
sitting incumbent with national name recognition,
it's almost unheard of. It completely rewrites
the conventional wisdom on how safe these seats
are. Especially when you consider the voting
record. The data shows Crenshaw voted with the
mangy wing of the party 95 percent of the time.
He was a reliable vote. But that remaining five
percent where he diverged was fatal to his career.
He was the only House incumbent running for reelection
in Texas who did not secure Donald Trump's endorsement.
Add to that the fact that Senator Ted Cruz actively
campaigned against him in his own district and
it was game over. It shows how rigid and unforgiving
the purity tests have become these primaries.
Having a 95 percent voting alignment used to
make you bulletproof. Now, missing a single endorsement
completely erased a massive incumbency advantage.
Crazy to think about. And the rapid fire drama
across the rest of the House races is just as
intense. Take Texas District 15. The Democrats
are desperately trying to win this red -leaning
district back, and they nominated Bobby Polito.
The Tejano music star. Right. The analysis literally
compares this to Snoop Dogg running for Congress
in South LA because Polito is massive in that
scene. He cruised to victory with 68 % of the
vote against Ada Quiller. But he comes with serious
baggage. A huge history of social media posts
that the strategist's note could easily be read
as misogynist. His Republican opponent is undoubtedly
going to weaponize that entire digital footprint
against him in the general. It's the classic
double -edged sword of running a celebrity candidate.
You get incredible built -in name recognition
and media coverage. But they often come with
a highly unvetted public history that opposition
researchers will just tear apart. Exactly. Then
you have Texas District 23, which is heading
to a wildly chaotic runoff. You have incumbent
representative Tony Gonzalez, who is currently
embroiled in a massive scandal involving an alleged
affair with a staffer who subsequently committed
suicide. Such a dark storyline for a campaign.
Very. And he's up against Brandon Herrera, who
the researchers describe as a gun fanatic whose
public platform essentially argues that every
home needs an AK -47 right next to the broom.
And after all, While the votes were counted,
they're separated by less than two percentage
points. Insane margins. But while these local
races provide a lot of localized drama, we have
to shift our focus to South Carolina. Because
what is happening there with Representative Nancy
Mase has direct macro political implications
for the entire U .S. House of Representatives.
Let's get into it. The House Ethics Committee
recently announced they are investigating her
for allegedly padding her housing reimbursements
by about $10 ,000. And the character assessment
in the analysis doesn't any punches either. They
note she has a reputation for anger management
issues and is incredibly unpopular with her colleagues
on Capitol Hill. The macro political threat here
is profound. Mace is already retiring from the
House to run for governor of South Carolina.
Right. Because she is not viewed as a team player
and has such fraught relationships in Washington,
the strategist theorized she might just quit
the House early out of spite. Wow. And if she
resigns before her term is up, it severely threatens
Speaker Mike Johnson's incredibly thin majority
margin. It brings the mathematical possibility
of him losing the gavel completely into view.
Every single seat is a load -bearing wall right
now. Exactly. Meanwhile, the exact opposite kind
of luck is happening in New York for Republican
Representative Nicole Maliotakis. She was essentially
saved by the Supreme Court's shadow docket. Which
is a huge deal. For those who aren't deep into
legal jargon, the shadow docket refers to emergency
orders and summary decisions made by the Supreme
Court without going through the usual lengthy
process of full briefings and oral arguments.
Two New York courts had ruled against her in
a redistricting case, which would have redrawn
her map unfavorably. The U .S. Supreme Court
stepped in via the shadow docket and put the
New York court's decision on hold. And the legal
analysis notes there was a concurrence from Justice
Samuel Alito and likely five or six conservative
justices backing the stay, signaling strong support
for her position. The timing is everything here.
Because the filing deadline in New York is June
23rd, the normal appeals process won't play out
in time to change the maps for this election.
So she gets a free pass. Right. An easy run in
what we call an R plus 10 district. That simply
means the district's voter base already leans
Republican by a massive 10 point mark. She is
incredibly safe before any new redistricting
can actually threaten her seat. It perfectly
illustrates how judicial timing and procedural
maneuvers can be just as critical as voter turnout
when the margins in the House of Representatives
are this incredibly tight. So if you're keeping
track, we have all this incredible volatility
at the ballot box. Politicians fighting for their
political lives, historical incumbency advantages
evaporating and legislative margins shrinking
to almost nothing. Right. But what happens when
you take a deeply fractured, hyper -partisan
U .S. government that is fighting over single
seats and you hit it with a massive unexpected
global crisis? That is the big question. That
brings us to our second major storyline. The
research provides a deep dive into the macroeconomic
fallout from the recent U .S. and Israeli strikes
on Iran and the subsequent death of Iranian leadership.
If we connect this to the bigger picture, the
domestic political instability we just spent
time unpacking is going to be severely tested
by external economic pressures. Yeah, without
a doubt. The macroeconomic analysts outline two
distinct market disruption scenarios following
these strikes. The first is the moderate disruption
scenario. In this scenario, the assumption is
that primarily Iranian crude exports are impeded.
Iran exports roughly two million barrels of oil
per day. If that supply is choked off, The models
show oil spiking to around $80 to $90 per barrel.
But the analysts anticipate this specific spike
would be relatively short -lived. Why is that?
Because a post -Khamenei Tehran is going to desperately
need sound economics and oil revenue simply to
ensure regime survival. If the new leadership
adopts a more practical stance to keep the cash
flowing, the global economy could actually absorb
this shock relatively well through standard fiscal
interventions and tapping reserves. So that is
the absolute best -case scenario. Yes. But the
second scenario outlined in the research is much
darker, and that is the material disruption scenario.
This happens if the conflict doesn't stay contained.
Right. If it widens to other energy -producing
neighbors in the Persian Gulf, And specifically,
if transit through the Strait of Hormuz is significantly
blocked or threatened. And the data they provided
in the Strait of Hormuz is frankly terrifying.
20 million barrels of oil per day travel through
that specific geographic bottleneck. 80 % of
that oil goes directly to Asia. And if it's blocked?
The International Energy Agency estimates that
only 3 .5 to 5 .5 million barrels can be safely
redirected using existing pipeline capacities.
That leaves a massive gaping hole in the global
energy supply. You simply cannot put 20 million
barrels of oil on a fleet of trucks to get around
a blockade. No, you can't. In this material scenario,
oil wouldn't just spike to $90. The models project
it would spike well over $100 per barrel and
stay there for a sustained period. We're talking
about a shock to the system, much like we saw
in 2022 following Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
To put the severity of that in perspective, the
analysts included some fascinating historical
chart data. Yeah, this part was super interesting.
If you look at major geopolitical events over
the last few decades, mapping everything from
the Gulf War in 1990 all the way to the October
2023 Hamas attack on Israel, the mean price increase
of Brent crude oil usually stays below 10 % in
the 100 days following the initial shock. But
when you have an extreme disruption, Like the
complete blockage of a major artery like the
Strait of Hormuz, that spike can easily exceed
40%. in less than 100 days. This raises an important
question. How does a 40 % spike in the price
of crude oil actually hit global growth? Right.
And more importantly for you listening, how does
it hit your wallet? The economists provide a
really useful macroeconomic rule of thumb to
understand this translation from barrel price
to everyday life. I love a good rule of thumb.
Every sustained $10 per barrel increase in the
price of oil lowers global GDP growth by 10 to
20 basis points. Let's translate that out of
Wall Street speak for a second. A basis point
is simply one hundredth of a percentage point.
So 10 to 20 basis points is a 0 .1 to 0 .2 percent
drop in total global economic growth. It might
sound like a tiny fraction. But when you apply
it to the massive scale of the entire global
economy, it represents hundreds of billions of
dollars evaporating into thin air. It acts like
a massive hidden tax on every single consumer
and business on Earth. It lowers real disposable
income everywhere. People spend more to heat
their homes and fill their cars, which means
they spend less on everything else, slowing down
the entire economic engine. Right. But. And this
is a crucial distinction the analysts make. The
United States is uniquely positioned to handle
this. Yes. The data points out a huge structural
advantage for the U .S. Because of our massive
domestic oil production over the last decade,
the United States is essentially insulated from
the absolute worst of the blow. That exact same
$10 per barrel increase that knocks 20 basis
points off global growth. It only trims three
to five basis points from the U .S. baseline
growth. Our domestic production acts as a massive
heavy duty shock absorber for the American economy.
Which brings us to the practical application
of all this heavy data. So what does this all
mean for you? If you're sitting there looking
at your retirement portfolio right now or preparing
for a board meeting wondering how a Texas primary
or a Middle Eastern conflict affects your bottom
line. This next part is exactly why we pull these
specific sources. The financial analysts break
down a very specific asset class strategy for
navigating this exact environment. First, they
recommend being overweight on precious metals
and commodities. In a world defined by geopolitical
upheaval and stagflationary risks, which is that
nasty economic combination of stagnant economic
growth happening at the same time as high inflation,
these tangible assets act as a vital hedge. Makes
total sense. Second, traditional safe havens
like U .S. treasuries and the U .S. dollar are
highly likely to regain their premium status.
When global panic sets in, Institutional money
will flock to them for security, but the warning
lights in these reports are really flashing red
for risk assets Yeah, we are talking about everyday
equities growth stocks and corporate bonds risk
assets are highly vulnerable to a severe Downward
repricing right now and it's not just because
of the oil shock and a vacuum. It is a compounding
effect a perfect storm You have the massive energy
spike combined with ongoing structural disruptions
from artificial intelligence completely reshaping
industries, plus massive uncertainties around
U .S. trade policies and upcoming Federal Reserve
appointments. And when central banks see an energy
shock, their immediate reflex is to worry about
inflation. Exactly. They might hike interest
rates in response or keep them higher for longer.
Because of all that compounding pressure, credit
spreads are poised to widen significantly. For
those outside the bond market, a credit spread
is the difference in yield between a safe government
bond and a riskier corporate bond. And when that
spread widens, it means borrowing money just
got a lot more expensive for businesses, which
cuts into profits, slows down hiring, and ultimately
hits stock prices. It really is a perfect storm
of volatility, which brings us full circle to
synthesize what we've been unpacking today. 2026
is shaping up to be a year completely defined
by razor -thin margins. We are seeing it in the
dead heat primary runoffs in Texas, the single
-digit margins of error for the Speaker of the
House, and the incredibly fragile supply chains
passing through the Strait of Hormuz. Understanding
how these dual currents domestic political chaos
and global energy shocks interact is what allows
you to anticipate rather than just react. Absolutely.
Whether you are prepping for a major corporate
strategy meeting tomorrow morning or you're just
casually checking your portfolio over coffee,
knowing that a single representative resigning
in South Carolina or a single pipeline maxing
out in the Middle East can trigger a massive
cascade effect gives you a distinct advantage.
And that leaves us with one final incredibly
provocative thought from all this research for
you to chew on. We just established that U .S.
domestic energy production is the primary heavy
duty shield protecting the American economy from
a devastating global oil shock. So the question
is, how will the highly volatile, totally unpredictable
politicians we just saw fighting for their political
lives in these chaotic primaries wield that economic
shield heading into the general election? Because
when the political margin for error is exactly
zero, Every single policy decision, especially
around energy, becomes a weapon. It is a dynamic
that is going to shape the entirety of the global
economy for the rest of the year, without a doubt.
It really is. We want to thank you so much for
joining us on this deep dive. We hope digging
into this day to help cut through the noise and
brought some real clarity to your day. Stay curious,
keep paying close attention to those margins,
and we will catch you next time.